Focus Groups
Abstract
Over the past decade, focus groups and group interviews have reemerged as a popular technique for gathering qualitative data, both among sociologists and across a wide range of academic and applied research areas. Focus groups are currently used as both a self-contained method and in combination with surveys and other research methods, most notably individual, in-depth interviews. Comparisons between focus groups and both surveys and individual interviews help to show the specific advantages and disadvantages of group interviews, concentrating on the role of the group in producing interaction and the role of the moderator in guiding this interaction. The advantages of focus groups can be maximized through careful attention to research design issues at both the project and the group level. Important future directions include: the development of standards for reporting focus group research, more methodological research on focus groups, more attention to data analysis issues, and more engagement with the concerns of the research participants.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Focus groups of 4 to 6 groups with 6 to 10 individuals in each group have been suggested as optimal in other studies.
“The focus groups will comprise 4 to 6 groups with 6 to 10 individuals in each group as has been suggested as optimal in other studies.61”
From A novel ACT-based video game to support mental health through embedded learning: A mixed-methods feasibility study protocol (2020) · cites this paper as [61]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 79 · Cited by 2,353
- Authors
- Morgan, D. L.
- Affiliations
- Portland State University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Morgan, David L.
- ORCID
- Morgan, David L.
- Venue
- Annual Review of Sociology
- Publisher
- Annual Reviews
- Published
- 1996-08
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 129-152
- ISSN
- 0360-0572 (ISSN-L)
- 1545-2115
- OpenAlex
- W4243384190
- Cited by
- 2,353
- References
- 79
- Citations by year
- 2026: 170 · 2025: 190 · 2024: 188 · 2023: 147 · 2022: 160 · 2021: 180 · 2020: 129 · 2019: 125 · 2018: 133 · 2017: 115 · 2016: 91 · 2015: 111 · 2014: 101 · 2013: 74 · 2012: 89
- FWCI
- 6.69
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Annual Review of Sociology (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Focus Groups and Qualitative Methods
- Social Sciences › Education › Qualitative Research Methods and Applications
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
- Keywords
- focus groups, group interviews, qualitative data collection, group interaction, moderator role, research design, reporting guidelines, data analysis
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review